Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of 109 civil society organisations calls for a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and the closure of carbon market loopholes. The letter demands that market-based mechanisms be tied to binding targets and proposes specific reforms to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), including human rights safeguards, a robust appeals procedure, and the exclusion of non-additional projects and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).

The paper examines the EU power sector's transition toward a low-carbon future, highlighting the critical role of the electricity sector in decarbonizing transport and buildings. It identifies significant risks in current investment trends, such as carbon lock-in from new gas and coal plants, and argues that the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fails to provide a credible long-term signal for post-2020 investments. The authors recommend establishing post-2020 emissions caps and calibrating the ETS to ensure carbon scarcity after accounting for energy efficiency and renewable energy objectives.

The document examines how unilateral carbon pricing creates production cost variations that may lead to 'carbon leakage'—the relocation of production to regions with less stringent environmental standards. It analyzes policy mechanisms to mitigate these risks, such as free allowances and Border Carbon Adjustments (BCAs), while highlighting the industry's strategic role in providing essential materials for low-carbon infrastructure. The brief argues that because the mining and metals sector is emissions-intensive and trade-exposed, policy design must account for specific commodity characteristics and long investment cycles to avoid jeopardizing economic viability and environmental integrity.

The report argues that climate economics lags behind climate science, often relying on outdated data and simplified cost-benefit frameworks. It advocates for a shift toward precautionary, standards-based decision-making to avoid catastrophic tipping points, such as the collapse of the Amazon rain forest or large-scale methane release. The authors recommend that economic models incorporate up-to-date probability distributions for climate sensitivity, account for regional vulnerabilities, and use endogenous technological change to model abatement costs. The report emphasizes that limiting warming to 2°C requires immediate, large-scale emissions reductions, as current international commitments are insufficient.

The report argues that climate economics lags behind climate science, often relying on outdated damage functions and oversimplified cost-benefit frameworks. It advocates for a shift toward standards-based (precautionary) decision-making to avoid catastrophic tipping points, such as the collapse of ice sheets or the Amazon rainforest. The authors recommend that models incorporate endogenous technological change, explicit discount rate justifications, and regional equity considerations to provide policy-relevant guidance for staying below a 2°C warming threshold.

The report finds that U.S. thermoelectric power plants withdrew between 60 billion and 170 billion gallons of freshwater daily in 2008, with coal plants accounting for the majority of this use. It identifies significant regional disparities in water intensity, noting that plants in the East generally withdraw more water due to a higher prevalence of once-through cooling. The analysis reveals that power plants contributed to water-supply stress in 20% of the 400 stressed watersheds identified. Furthermore, the report highlights critical gaps and inaccuracies in U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data, including the total absence of reporting from the nuclear fleet. It argues that climate change and population growth will exacerbate these stresses, urging a shift toward low-water cooling technologies and low-carbon energy sources to ensure grid reliability and ecosystem health.

The report finds that U.S. power plants withdraw massive volumes of freshwater, with coal and nuclear plants being the most water-intensive. This demand contributes to water-supply stress in hundreds of watersheds and is exacerbated by droughts and heat waves. The authors highlight significant gaps and inaccuracies in EIA reporting and advocate for 'water-smart' energy choices, such as dry cooling and low-water renewables, to ensure energy reliability and water security.

The Clean Air Task Force argues against the 'zero-sum' race metaphor between the US and China regarding clean energy, suggesting instead that China's capacity for large-scale demonstration and investment provides a 'test bed' that can benefit the US through 'reverse innovation' and capital flow. While acknowledging trade disputes and IP theft, the author suggests the US focus on high-end design and systems integration rather than low-end commodity manufacturing, which is increasingly automated or cost-prohibitive to ship.

The study uses the POLES model to assess how different levels of economic growth and convergence between developed and developing nations affect the energy mix and abatement costs required to reduce global CO2 emissions by 50% by 2050. It finds that low stabilisation is technically feasible and economically viable across all scenarios, with total abatement costs representing less than 2% of global GDP by 2050. However, the results highlight that high convergence increases the reliance on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and places a higher absolute burden on developing countries, while developed nations continue to bear the majority of the costs.

The document details the early application of EPA greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations for stationary sources, focusing on the role of state regulators in issuing pre-construction permits. It describes the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis process, the EPA's case-by-case guidance, and the specific three-year deferral of CO2 permitting for biogenic sources. Case studies from Louisiana, Utah, and Michigan illustrate varying levels of state compliance and interpretation of EPA guidelines, while noting ongoing legal and legislative challenges to the EPA's authority.

The authors assert that avoiding the worst consequences of climate change requires virtually zeroing out electricity-related carbon emissions by mid-century, which necessitates the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) for all fossil fuels. They highlight the critical risk posed by new coal power plants in China and India and criticize the U.S. policy approach as 'ad hoc and woefully inadequate', citing the shelving of American Electric Power's Mountaineer project. To drive deployment and lower costs, the authors recommend that the Obama Administration propose strong new source performance standards, the Department of Energy reform funding for initiatives like the Clean Coal Power Initiative, and Congress adopt significant industry incentives.

The EPA is implementing a phased approach to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, starting with the largest industrial sources. Following a 2007 Supreme Court ruling and a 2009 Endangerment Finding, the EPA established permitting requirements for new or modified facilities emitting significant amounts of CO2e. These requirements include a Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis. The agency has also implemented a three-year deferral for biomass facilities and plans to establish New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for power plants and oil refineries by 2012.

The report finds that the EU ETS is significantly oversupplied, with industrial sectors accumulating large surpluses of permits while the power sector faces a shortfall. This imbalance, exacerbated by the 2008 recession, threatens to weaken the Phase 3 cap by approximately 1.9Gt. The author highlights abuses in international offsetting, where surplus-holding installations use offsets for profit (arbitrage) or to subsidize foreign competitors. To rectify this, the report recommends a 1.7Gt set-aside of Phase 3 permits, a steeper annual cap reduction of 2.4% by 2016, and increased transparency in reporting installation ownership and waste gas transfers.

The document explains the methodology of the Green Footstep tool, which calculates the net carbon flow of building projects by analyzing site development, construction, and operation. It defines carbon neutrality as achieving a net carbon storage level equal to or greater than the site's native state. The paper provides specific formulas for calculating native site carbon storage, emissions from site development, and operational emissions. For construction emissions, it details an Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIO LCA) approach based on 1997 US economic data, offering coefficients for residential, multifamily, manufacturing/industrial, and commercial/institutional sectors. It also includes a historical validation comparing 1997 energy intensity coefficients with 1967 data, noting a general decrease in energy intensity for most sectors except commercial and institutional buildings.

The report analyzes the potential for the Midwest to transition to a clean energy economy by adopting the Midwestern Governors Association's (MGA) targets: reducing electricity use by 2% annually and sourcing 30% of electricity from renewables by 2030. Using a modified National Energy Modeling System (NEMS), the Union of Concerned Scientists finds that these goals are achievable and would lead to significant job creation, consumer savings, and carbon emission reductions. The analysis highlights wind and biopower as the most competitive resources, while noting that transmission capacity remains a primary barrier. The report argues that regional targets would complement a federal carbon policy, making such a policy more affordable for consumers.

The document outlines the 40-year history and strategic framework of Friends of the Earth International (FoEI), a global federation of 76 member groups. It argues that environmental destruction, poverty, and human rights violations are systemic issues rooted in a neoliberal economic model. FoEI's approach focuses on 'mobilizing, resisting, and transforming' through key concepts such as climate justice, ecological debt, and food sovereignty. The report details specific campaigns against extractive industries, GMOs, and deforestation, while highlighting the role of grassroots activism and international solidarity in achieving policy changes and protecting indigenous rights.

Friends of the Earth International (FoEI) marks 40 years as a global federation of 76 member groups and over 2 million collaborators. The organization advocates for environmental and social justice by opposing neoliberal economic models and 'false solutions' to the climate crisis. Its strategic framework focuses on three pillars: mobilizing public support, resisting the root causes of environmental degradation, and transforming societies through concepts like ecological debt, food sovereignty, and climate justice. FoEI's work spans diverse sectors, including opposing industrial mining and fossil fuels, protecting biodiversity and forests, and promoting sustainable, local food systems.

The report criticizes the World Bank for its continued investment in 'dirty energy' and its leadership in expanding carbon markets. It highlights specific projects, such as the Medupi coal plant in South Africa and the Nam Theun 2 dam in Laos, as evidence of environmental and social harm. The document further contends that the Bank's promotion of REDD and carbon offsets leads to the privatization of forests and the marginalization of indigenous rights, while its role as an interim trustee for the Green Climate Fund is viewed as undemocratic and conflicted.

The report criticizes the World Bank for its continued funding of coal-fired power plants and large hydropower projects, which it claims lock developing nations into high-carbon futures and cause significant social and environmental harm. It specifically highlights the Medupi plant in South Africa and the Tata Mundra plant in India as examples of 'dirty energy' investment. The document also attacks the Bank's role in expanding carbon markets and REDD schemes, arguing that these mechanisms privatize forests, marginalize Indigenous peoples, and allow rich nations to avoid real emission cuts. Finally, it expresses concern over the Bank's role as the interim trustee of the Green Climate Fund, citing a lack of democratic accountability and a poor track record on social justice.

The document examines the viability of large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) deployment in developing countries, arguing that such technology must be analyzed as a strategic issue within the broader context of national development due to competing socio-economic priorities.